Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 .

Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija.nauåni karakter.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu. Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje. ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu. On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije. veñ i socioloãki. jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera. inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno . Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko . razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih.

8 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .

Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala .5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11. Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka.03. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo.com Andrej Tarkovski . a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano.03. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama. veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju.tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail. åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da. Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa.

. zato ãto ga æivim. u kome autor. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke. Metalnikov.2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija..nostalghia. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema. Tako. wihovi prirodni neuspesi.Meœutim. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. 1 A B. razgovara sam sa sobom“. ne mareñi za sagovornika. originalne. samo monolog. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem. . Ali. Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a. http://www.10 Teoloãki åasopis.. M. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem.com 2 Idem. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard.. je o filmu Ogledalo. Kuåev. nakon svega. ali uvek duboke misli. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest. M.To je. sovjetski kritiåar. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo.

Stalkera.). prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama. 1999.nostalghia. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. 8. Vajawe u vremenu. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem. 1989. na primer. o åeæwi za apsolutnim. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji. nisam nikada imao. Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. Bird. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. svetu.com . U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. Novi Sad. o wegovom smislu. 5 Robert. Umentiåka druæina ANonim. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. 4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. Prometej. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. komentatora. Beograd. onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. æivot kao san. wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. do tada.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto. Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. tumaåa. http://www. Odjednom.“4 Ipak.

N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. On daje æivot metaforama. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine. alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. Po wemu. na æalost. Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. Ipak. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove. na pogreãnoj strani. Tako shvañen simbol . Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“.12 Teoloãki åasopis. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda. odnosno. potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. pretenziji na umetnost. Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu. Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela.

6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe. boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao. govorio je. mi smo bespomoñni“. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more.. op. .Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni.. kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno. cit.. „Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima. koristio je simbole. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija. poput kristala. Ipak. ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu. Uistinu. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola. 6 Andrej Tarkovski. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu. 46. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti. neposredno i emocionalno... On ima mnogo lica i misli. On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom. parabola i poreœewa..

Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe.“8 Tarkovski je. ravni åudu. tako.14 Teoloãki åasopis. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost. Reaktion Books. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. odnosno. 2008. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine. a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. . ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“. London. 71. dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. Ibid. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. 73. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi.

subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. takoœe. javqawe mrtvog Teofana. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. slike i narativa. ponovo. realnog åoveka. señawe. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi. unutraãwa realnost. San. sve izgledalo drugaåije. u Andreju Rubqovu. pogled ka unutra. duhovna dimenzija. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. Po Tarkovskom. åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. Wega interesuje i druga. jedna od karakteristika ikone. ãto je. Kao i figure na ikoni. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa. sneg u crkvi. snova i maãte. Jedinstven. . glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. ruska Golgota. ali ne izraæajan. a ne glumi. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. svojstveno ikoni). ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. kao ãto su let balonom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. na primer. utisaka i raspoloæewa. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno. wegova nevidqiva. ali je na kraju. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra.

haiku poezija. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici. Boju je. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku. takoœe. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. http://www. na primer.16 Teoloãki åasopis. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. jambiåki pentametar. åak monohtromnu.com . N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije. takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. Andrea Trpin. wemu veoma draga. Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. ãto je vidno u Stalkeru. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju.“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora. autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. Ipak.nostalghia. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave.

Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. London. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem.10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. a stranci unutra. Robert Bird. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. potoci. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi.. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu. Reaktion Books. . da li da veruju u priåu. kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled. 2008.) . Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. Priroda – drveñe. koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva. voda (kiãa. Ipak. trava. bare. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña. na ivici panteizma. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba. 51-69. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar.. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte. sneg. a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe.

U Stalkeru. gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. Kasnije. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom.22. Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. krstovi. åipka. . Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. simbolom novog æivota. 8. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj. kwige. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. Kuñu. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. Tarkovski. plamen. a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije. a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri. 21. razume. dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. oltar sa hlebom. dolazi do izvesne promene. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija.18 Teoloãki åasopis. zvono. Rim. prosuto mleko. ona kao da vidi. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. nakon Katasonikove smrti.

zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. iznad svega. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. za istinskim postojawem. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. Za Tarkovskog. op. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi. iskupqewa i ærtve. po wemu. . Jer. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva.14 Umetnost se. cit. Ako ne da objasni. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. instrument wegovog saznavawa. jedini drugi put je. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. za izmirewem. onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. na æalost. a sam umetnik je. tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota. ona ipak. padova i pokajawa. iscequje. stradawa i zla. åeznu za Biñem. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku.

Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama. Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno. op. molitvu. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. govorio je. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. veru qubav. sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim. N° 9 propadawu. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“. unutraãwim tragawima.. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa. Andrej Tarkovski. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim. nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti. boæansko.16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik.. 237 . cit.. ãto ga. transcendentno. po naãem miãqewu.. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce. uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera. 206. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije. cit..20 Teoloãki åasopis. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i.. „nadu. op.

An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. David.com . Wishard. Vajawe u vremenu. Beograd. http://www. Bird. 1989. Andrej. London. Umetniåka druæina Anonim. Prometej.nostalghia. Robert. Robert. Tarkovska. 2008. Marina. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. Reaktion Books. (prireœ.nostalghia.).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird. 1999.com Tarkovski. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Novi Sad. http://www.

. but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves.22 Teoloãki åasopis. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. but on skillful use of basic elements of film. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means. Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience.

2010 Lazar Neãiñ.02. zacementirana Liturgija.lazar@gmail.01. bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista. Liturgije.96:252 Primljeno 19. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet. itd. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“. Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic. otvorenosti Crkve. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. pojmova i savremenih interpretacija. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti. Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281. za eshatoloãku Evharistiju.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla. tj.2010 Prihvañeno: 23. wegovih uåewa. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire.

„opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. otkrivawe neotkrivenog. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. Zacementirano. åoveka. definicija. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka. .. moguñnost nemoguñeg. „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. pre svega.. opitno. iskaza. Bogoslovqe.24 Teoloãki åasopis. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. Bogoslovqe se zbiva.Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. doæivqaja. deãava. nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“. N° 9 1. uvek – iznova – okuãano. veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. riziåno – bezdano. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. sveta. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga. dogaœa. prizivajuñe. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. niti „definicija Boga“. suæivota. Bogoslovqe je. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova. æivota. jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost. veåito epikleptiåko . Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. dakle.

„pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. naæalost. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. zapisa. bezdan neotkriveni. i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako. uvodi 1 Jn 1.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. mewa obiåaje. ãto je danas zakon postojawa. „tradicije“. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“. jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone. . Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“. itd. Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog... Ali. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa. itd. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. tradicije. patriotizma. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. „porodice“. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. u samosigurnosti. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. sa jednom velikom razlikom. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. Bogoslovqe je rizik. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“. tekstova.

. dolazeñe – novo. Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. bogosluæbenih. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio. Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. itd. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. ono ãto iskamo. itd. koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti. in. ãto åekamo.). jer ubija svako naãe sebence. mrtvu floskulu. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. . dogaœajno – novo. trendi. neponovqivo – novo. kul. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. molio se. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). novost. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. za åim åeznemo. tj. Jn 1. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. otaåkih. tj. Jedinog Novog. svagda – novo. neoåekivano – novo. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. tj. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“. Novina.. Ona osposobqava. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. istorijskih. fensi. veåno – novo. u Crkvi5.. N° 9 haos u harmoniju. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. problema i moguñih razjaãwewa.ali to je tek poåetak. 1 – 14 5 Ali opet. leåi.26 Teoloãki åasopis. 21 – 44. itd. ono ãto prizivamo. åemu se nadamo. saborskih. jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. Hrista.

Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti. praviti. Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije. a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. Pisma. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. viãe je nego opasno. tj. Evharistijom. ujeziåavati. ali daleke.. na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. itd. Mestu koje je Tamo. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. æivim susretom. kovawem novih reåi. muåeniãtvom. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“. itd. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva. idr. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota. ne funkcioniãe. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. u naãem sebiånom xepu. „predawima“. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. askezom. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno.. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. tekstova. otaåke proãlosti. ne prima. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. iskustvom. æivotnost. (Poznato je da hrana. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6.

tragawe. Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto. tj. nepokajawem. Setimo se samo o. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. najæivotnijeg.28 Teoloãki åasopis. tragizam. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. gresima. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde. To je Mesto razgovora. nespremnoãñu. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano. poredak. tj. 384). savetovawa.Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’. zapitanosti. Lestviånik. najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim. Priåeãña. u koje åesto upadamo8. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima.. Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“. to je parodija istine. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu. ono Drugo. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“. najbitnijeg. str. osluãkivawa. dijaloga. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe. ono Neoåekivano. 1998: 45 9 . molitvom. mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota. postom. N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. u Liturgiju. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. „jeretiåno“ åak. Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. æivotom qubavi i ærtve.. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. tj. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. 7 8 Pokajawem. Hristov æivot u nama.

iznenaœuje davawem. Ali.. tj. Æivota koji Dolazi.. buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ . . „Nova Tvar“. Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti. hermeneutiãu? 2.sasvim Ovde. kao i celini rada. Da blagodarimo. ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21. Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. Darovawe buduñeg æivota. ili dara bez kalkulacije.sada ali ne . osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. samo obiåne reåi. daruje. takoœe i Dar10. poklawa. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ .prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . koji dolazeñi – donosi. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu. takoœe apsolutnog dara. biñe nadahnuta. da me vrate u æivot. proæeta. i bez duga koji prethodi. Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. saopãtavaju. veka one govore. Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo.Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je.oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati. bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi. ono „Drugo“. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe.

Ko je. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. Beograd. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. N° 9 Novog i Drugog. Hrista“. naziva. naåin postojawa. spasewe. Carstvo Boæije. Evharistija. Dolazeñeg. danas Gospod Isus Hristos. ikonomija. otaåkog. . ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. reåi. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11. post. nerazdeqivost prirode. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. æivot veåni. kenoza. 1998. imena. Teologija i Jezik. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu. Vaskrsewe. tj. duhovnost. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega. Hriãñanska misao. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. Jedinorodni. Takoœe. ipostas. mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu. molitva. logosi biña.30 Teoloãki åasopis. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. za nas. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. imenica. predawskog.

isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim. idr. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. Rijeka. problema. galerije. „istoriåno – nacionalno“. dehumanizacije u nauci. eshatologijom. „zanimqivo“. bacaju ga u fioke. tj. • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. Hristom. ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. Do tada. koncertne dvorane. 2008. ) . Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. „umetniåko – vrednosno“. U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. 12 . muzeje. a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. Strah od sveta. vode bogoslovqe. biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe). za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. ipak. „religijsko“. police. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. tj. problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. tj. „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim).

13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. tj. O gramatologiji. Veselin Masleãa. u stvari. danas. tj. . Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa. ali i hriãñanstva. Ona je. . jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. drugi ga preziru. åoveku. ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. Pisawe i razlika. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. terminologije i problema. 2008. Sarajevo. • Govor o Bogu. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. Naãe bogoslovqe je.32 Teoloãki åasopis. tj. Ãahin Paãiñ. Sarajevo. samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika.

pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. Sluæiti Liturgiju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. 2008. 16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“. ameriåki filosof religije. ozbiqnosti. Indiana University Press. eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). itd. moliti se i postiti. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10. kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde. i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16. 1999.10. odgovornosti. Svetu i bliæwem. Zone Books. Upravo kao veñ – sada . ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. rada. kretawem. kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?. ali ne –joã . 2008: 5 . bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu. dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. odsustva smisla. dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”. izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. danas. podviga. Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. videti u: Kopiñ. glavni je predstavnik ove misli. nemoñi. New York. kao stalno – dolazeñe. 39) 18 .

Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu. 1984: 5. ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . film. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics). 19 Ratzinger. S druge strane. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa. dakle. u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. N° 9 razrastawu). crkvena. Hrista.34 Teoloãki åasopis. jedan jezik – susret. poput: susret. nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. ovde preobraæene. Bogoslovqe se.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog.. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. muzika. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. sasvim Drugog. kwiæevnost. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka.. poezija. qubqewe. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu. moæda jedan meta – jezik?. hriãñanska.net/. tj. slikarstvo. tj. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. idr. npr. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska. gledawe. dodir. zagrqaj. itd. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi.

on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. tj. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. Åoveka. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija).. . Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik). a ne zaokruæuje istinu. ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori. Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju. on ne postoji pre susreta. tj. 3. jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog. dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije.. s jedne strane. monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje. u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“. tj.Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog. Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. u tom deãavawu. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. tj. Hrista. Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. on se gradi. poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik). Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog. tj. Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog. Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog.

Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. savremenog druãtva. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema. Majendorfa. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. I ne samo to. Hristosa Janarasa. Ãmemana. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke. Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. kada. J. Florovskog. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno. 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). idr. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. i ko je uzroånik krize. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. Pre svega. H.36 Teoloãki åasopis. Afanasjeva. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo. napisano. rastegnemo. promislimo. Ali. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. Åoveka. N.. Janarasa. tj. Pre svega. i dr. A. nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“. pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. . Georgorija Florovskog. 2008: 21. kako.

ontologija. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. kao: spasewe. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . svimapoznatu. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. Bog. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. Sveta Trojica. krajwem! Izuzetak. a koliko u æivom sustretu. duhovnost.. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli. molitva. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. ikonama. svrhu. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. Crkva.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. „stvarnom“. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. smirewe. spisima. tekstovima. erosnom. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem. qubavnom. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa. Hristos. pak. ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. igumana manastira Iviron. „tumaåewima“. predawima. 2008: 511 – 519. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. itd. sloboda. istinsku punoñu. qubav. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. ãta oni govore. vaskrsewe. post. liånost. nada. smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. Åudna je åiwenica. vera. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima. konvencionalnu. askeza. pravoslavqe.

oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe. oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. Ali. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome.biznis institucija. Mada. naãe æivqewe. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. duhovnost. naravno. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar.. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi. odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima.. u ovaj naã æivot. . ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv. Tako.38 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe. priznajemo sa æaqewem. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi. oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. razumevawa. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. jer. S druge strane. naã dvig ka Wemu. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. dakle. Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno . postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. 1998: 53. jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. Tako. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa.

Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija. kakvu autentiånost. ili bivajuñi izvor istog. naivnost. marame i ãamije. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. tj.od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. kakvu stvarnost. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. U suãtini. gluma. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. poboænosti. . posledica su ove razdvojenosti. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . teatralnost. liturgije. „starinama“. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. Naravno. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. „praksama“. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. mrtvu stvarnost. uzdasi. bezidentitetnost. maske. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. Neaktuelnost. Ipak. Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. Kakvu reå. „askezama“. „obiåajima“. ili neãto tako sliåno. Za proseånog hriãñanina. hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. tj.

pravila.40 Teoloãki åasopis. Samo Tu. . jeziåkih oblikovawa. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve. Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. „pravoslavnih etika“. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. Tako i samo tako. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot. mrtvilo mrtvosti. tj. ali mrtvih eksponata. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. iskustveni. Evharistije. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve.æivota – Donositeqa. znawa. itd. mræwa. umirawa. b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. preævakavawa starih floskula. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. 28 Zizjulas. na tom Mestu. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . trvewa. tj. tj. onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. saborni. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi. æivi. Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. evharistijska liturgija. 2004: 34. uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. bogoslovqe. zakona. evharistijsko bogoslovqe. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. N° 9 jawe. obiåaja. iskuãewa. hriãñana. oni postaju iznova aktuelni. pored reåenog. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa. ali to i nije tema ovog rada. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja.Drugog“tj. evharistijska poboænost. samim tim i zatvoren. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa.

Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve. Problemi identiteta istih. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. Nama nije jasno. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. Ipak. Relevantnosti. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. posebno Novog Zaveta. pred nama stoje problemi klira. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. ãta je to? Ali. „eshatologije“. ali i unutar sveta. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. U stvari. . laika. Takoœe. antagonisti s druge strane. na æalost. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. pak. Nacionalizam. postaje danas ne mali problem.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti. „buduñnosti“. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. mnogo je nejasno. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. tj. Wihovi. jeste.

osmiãqavawe. Åeka. tj. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. neiskustvenog). Problemi. makar malo. za poåetak. sa trezvenoãñu. Ali. uvek zajedniåka. ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve. veronauke u ãkolama29. osoqavawe. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti. Oåekuje. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. do iznemoglosti. Problemi dehumanizacije. iãåekivawe. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. 29 Potrebno je iznova. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. biti dovoqno. problemi.. uvek liturgijska. tj. Nada se. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. Traæi. tj. Problem Crkve i politike. . tj. razmekãavawe. itd. Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. problemi.42 Teoloãki åasopis. otvarawe. Strepi. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe. i to ñe. koja je uvek saborna. Problem ekumenizma. Problem katiheze.

Raspeti Bog. Jaques 2004. Jovan 1998. Izazovi post – metafizike. The Weakness of God . . Pisanje i razlika. Joseph 1984. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. Jovan 2004.The Theology of Event. Zagreb: Krãñanska misao. Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Teologija i jezik. Papadopulos. John 2008. Ratzinger. Caputo. Moltmann. Chicago: Indiana University Press. Lestviånik. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Jurgen 2008. Mario 2008. Rijeka: Ex Libris. Novi Sad: Beseda.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas. Naã æivot u Hristu. Uvod u krãñanstvo. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Aleksandar 2008. Ãmeman. Hristov æivot u nama. Stilijan 1998. Derrida. Kopiñ.

ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve. ponaosob. Na dan Pedesetnice. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. .rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica.01. i svakome daje posebne darove. Sveti Duh. u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje. Takoœe. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno. ikona. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve. 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend. simbolizam.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291. kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa. geometrije.2010 Goce Delåeva 8.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije. koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha.02.edu. S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica. Primljeno: 21. perspektive). Taj naroåiti dar. kroz pisane i slikane izvore.

Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi. kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot. . Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista. oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. 2005: 387. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we.46 Teoloãki åasopis. ove dve ikone. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi.

pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6. 23. 3. Loski 2008: 202. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. Benc. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa. i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. Loski.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. 2003: 120. 2008: 208. odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2. O danu odmora. Isto. Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. Sin se vratio Ocu. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski.11). „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. Evdokimov: 2009: 230. 2006: 520. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. .16).

dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama. 2003: 122. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. Loski 2008: 202. da imate sabor sveti. Tako je Pedesetnica. sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10. åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma. naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8. U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi. Evdokimov: 2009: 232. koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. Æivot Crkve. kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom. 28. kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. . 2. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno.3). 2008: 209. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7.26). Isto. Loski. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa.48 Teoloãki åasopis. jer je Trojiånost. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. javqa se novozavetni Savez. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj. Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica.

(1976: 73-76). Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. 2. koji deli apostole. koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2. Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7.59). Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole. Princeton University Press. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9. ?. vek. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. . u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. veka (Manafis at al. Takoœe. na Sinaju. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap. 1990: 98). U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7. Vidi u Weitzmann. Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. slika 7. na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. vek. tamnog. str. u dve grupe. Weitzmann. Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10. 140. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. veka ili poåetak 10. K. koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. a potom unutar tog prostora. veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina.4). u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery.

50 Teoloãki åasopis. veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista. Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. stari kvasac. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. Evdokimov. Ipak. a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis. simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. Ozoqin. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. 1990. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. da bude novo tijesto. veka“14. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. dakle. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). 2009: 230. izmeœu apostola.7). 5. posredstvom Svetog Duha. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. 98-99. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva. . Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. 2007: 28. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. kao ãto ste beskvasni. Meœutim. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor.

Meœutim. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin.26). Iznad wene glave. sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin. U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. veka (Monza. noãen. 2007: 46). sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. 2007: 32-36. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. koji blagosiqa. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. prañen anœelom. br. dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka. gle. 10). Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. Na woj pronalazimo. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca. koji nose upaqene bakqe“. veka (Bobbio. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci.14). br. . takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. u gorwem delu. u mandorli. 1019). likovi imaju dubqe. 2007: 33). Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu. Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40). 1. Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto. 1.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. 16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. 2007: 39. anœelima. „Posledwi dan pedesetnice. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15. simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja.

godiãwe. 2007: 45-47. to je postalo sve. 2009: 126). veli Gospod“ (Is.52 Teoloãki åasopis. Gabra (2001. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini. 2005: 374). dakle. Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. Takoœe. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila. okruæena apostolima. Dap. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. slika 20. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski. . 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino. dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. sa dve kamile koje kleåe. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila.33). namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima. koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle. po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica.9). Vidi: Skalova. 23). a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4.2). 2. i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. serijskom proizvodu. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj. usmereni ka apostolima. veka (Jovanoviñ. prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom. Meœutim. 1. 1. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3. 66.

. Loski 2008: 209. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice. Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. 2005: 388. Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda. moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa. Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini. i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen. veka24. . Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin.47). Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. 2. u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. Detaqnije (Ozoqin. 25 26 Uspenski. odmah iznad glava apostola. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja. 2007: 53). prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. ikona ili fresaka. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap. okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe. to jest gornicu.) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25. 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (. 2007: 60-65). Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru.. Jovanoviñ. to jest u gornici.

Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. simvol Svetog Duha“27. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga. jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni.54 Teoloãki åasopis.neznaboæaåkog sveta. unutar trodelne kompozicije. Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa. i jedan golub na Kwizi. U sredini. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap. izmeœu apostola. Loski. Takoœe. veka. prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. tron. nalazi se prazan prostor. u manastiru Sveta Katarina. . „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa. a ipak razliåite“28. simvol Sina. simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. Uspenski. ni ugotovqeni presto. koji ostaje iza wih. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. 2008: 202. odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom). Meœutim. iznad apostola. iz 7. Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. veka. simvol Oca. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. 2. 2007: 74. Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin.

kroz silazak Svetog Duha. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. Od 12. 2009: 232. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve. Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. dakle u gornici. Uspenski. Loski. 2000: 50.2). 2. postavqenih u polukrugu. 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil. i primaju Sveti Duh. Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. . stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. 6. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola. veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31. 3. odnosno Hristom“30.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera. Otkr.13. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq. 2008: 208. Apostoli su prikazani. Evdokimov. Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski. åija tela åine Crkvu.14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa. 20. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu. prenosi na åoveka (apostole). Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka).

Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis. i ispod wih mala prostorija. Glas sa nebesa prestade.56 Teoloãki åasopis. i nad domom. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice. . i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. 2005: 367. 2002: 615-616.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa. 2002: 319. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. Mediñ. Jovanoviñ. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33.. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. gore. Sveti Duh kao golub.. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. Mediñ.

bezvremenu ravan. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. Iznad. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. u mraku. i 14. U povijenom luku ispod wih. veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli. Joil. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra. 17. veka (Rusija).1). Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. 2. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). . Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. 28-29). iz profila. duhovnu 37 Uspenski. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. boæanskog sveta materijalnim. Na ikoni kao i na fresci. a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli. 2. eshatoloãki smisao. 2. svaki detaq. boja. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. perspektiva. Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu. Kompozicija. ka sopstvenom svetu. Iako se veñ od 13.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. 2000: 161.

Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom. delio je narode. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap. Meœutim. 2.4). ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa.13).4). Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. Zajedno. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo. kraj 9. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov. Na ranijim prikazima. Pariz. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica.58 Teoloãki åasopis. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38. 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. 2004: 75. 2007: 6). oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. 2009: 232. mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. kondak glasa 8). 8. Paris Graec. Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. veka prema Ozoqinu. Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. folio 301).10). Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. 2. jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap. . 510. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija. 12. a kada je delio ogwene jezike.

kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. 2-5). apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. 17. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere. blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. 2004: 75. S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. Meœutim. 12. jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“. uopãte. Uspenski. jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi. simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. Meœutim. u pisanim izvorima. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. Svet ili Knez Mira41. primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi. Meœutim. Meœutim. Evdokimov. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. on je pognut godinama. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos.46). Loski 2008: 209. 2009: 233. i on. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. . on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli.

preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. Sa druge strane. 2009: 148. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46.60 Teoloãki åasopis. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. Isto. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. N° 9 prostoriji. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. Evdokimov. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. 44 45 46 Templ. Svi zajedno. svojom veliåinom. Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima). oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki. gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. . Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. prvi meœu jednakima. 2009: 328. tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq. Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka. 2009: 328.

Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). Meœutim. i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj. „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. u wegovo srediãte“47. u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci). Templ. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca. 2007: 141. Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin. boga ili cara. 2009: 114. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. . Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. Isto. U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. Isto. qude). vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. 2009: 140. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. 2007: 142. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama. na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije.

na ikoni Pedesetnice. U tami. Templ. Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52. tj. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac. 2009: 116.1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn. Bogdanoviñ. Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni.62 Teoloãki åasopis. . koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule).38). bdi starac. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu. Na vrhu ikone. na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove. 1963: 80. Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51. Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu. Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. knez ovoga sveta. 22. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne. 7.

39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. za nas ovaploñenoga. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. 7. omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. Loski. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. manastiri. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. Sina Boæijeg. 2008: 208.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga. Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga. jednu Crkvu. Uspenski. Loski. 2003: 119. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn. Sinu i Duhu. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. koje 53 54 55 Loski. i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima. 2003: 120-122. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. . U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“.

N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56. . to jest prikazivawu viãeg. eshatoloãki smisao. Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama.64 Teoloãki åasopis. Na ikoni. Kompozicija. Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere. (1978: 473-477). svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. boja. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. perspektiva.

Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Weitzmann. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Ernst 2006. Princeton: Princeton University. Œuro 1998. Jovanoviñ. Pavle 2009.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Daniåiñ. Kurt 1976. . Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Vladimir 2003. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo. Benc. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Loski. Dimitrije 1963. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Apokrifi novozavetni. Beograd. Beograd: Åigoja. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. Beograd: Prosveta. Beograd: Muzej SPC. Zoran 2005. Tomislav 2005. Stare srpske biografije. Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Evdokimov. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva. Jovanoviñ. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. 5. 6 . bestrasan. bezgreãnosti. otpali od Boga.dar Boæije blagodati. po prirodi.6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. 2003: 2. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno. N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg. non posse mori posse non mori Isto. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. telo bilo besmrtno. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka. åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom. Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. Isto. bezazlen.70 Teoloãki åasopis. åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan. svetosti i blaæenstva. Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva. tamu i smrt. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260. buduñi neokrnjene grehom. Tudoran. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost . bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 .3 Ipak.åovek nije sagreãio. i pali u greh. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. bezgreãan. nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile. svetlosti æivota. Takoœe. bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. prema tome. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji.1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja. Stvoren po liku Boæijem. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem .

Vidi: Franc Courth.7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode. ili. poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat. Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. 14. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. ali da nije i izgubljena. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena. Vidi: Tudoran. Vidi: Isto. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. pre svega. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati. odnosno. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. 273. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski. . u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada. Vidi: Justin Popoviñ. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode. ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. 1998: 138. 302.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. taånije. donum superadditum).8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. justitia originalis). 272. veñ „zatamnjen.

1989: 90. ali nije uniãtena.14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh.. Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. Vidi: Franc Courth. ali nije nestala. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. Imago Dei je potamnela. 1948: 644. N° 9 Nasuprot tome. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. 138. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. ãiri se.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. Vidi: Bloesch. Vidi: Bloesch. slava Boæija je okrnjena. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. sa viãe optimizma. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña.72 Teoloãki åasopis.“16 Ipak. odnosno. 1989: 90. F.“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. meœutim. veka. . tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga..

meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog. peccatum originale originatum). Jer 13. i gle. dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. . Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat. 15.“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. bez izuzetaka. Po apostolu Pavlu. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. kao i greh.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji. 46. odnosno. peccatum originale originans). Rim 3.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. 31.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. 21. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga. 2-3. 2003: 166. i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. i bi mu æao u srcu.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. 9-10. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu. Vidi: Nemet. U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti. Vidi: Isto. Ps 13. 5-6. sagreãili (1Moj 6. 1Car 8. 23). dobro beãe veoma. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda. Uporedi: Rim 5. 1 Moj 6. a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju.21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. 167. 5 i 8.

U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog. bez sklonosti ka grehu. kako uma. N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva. 4. 1998:108. bol. Prevashodno. Grigorije Niski. 6. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu. . koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26). Vidi: Isto. dakle. Vidi: Tudoran. tako i volje. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. Naæalost.74 Teoloãki åasopis. Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja.27 Na kraju. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje.24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. Sv. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. Grigorije Niski. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost. patnje. slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo. kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno.26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv.

Vidi: Isto. Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije. . projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo. bolesti. 295. dakle. samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama . pomraåenje razuma.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. potiåuñi od Adama.njenog ograniåenja."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh. stradanja i smrt. on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“. iskvarenost volje. Jasno je. Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo. Vidi: Isto. mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. Åovekov Pad: 3. 287. to jest. 290. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja. Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda. œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka. Najzad.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . oskrnavljenost srca. osiromaãenja i smrtnosti. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva. Vidi: Popoviñ.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega.

krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode. on je prouzrokovao podelu. a kada mu sluæi. frustracije.36 „Tako je åovek. Grigorije Niski. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost. Vidi: Tudoran. U fiziåkom smislu.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware. 8. Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. 1980: 282. (17:2) Popoviñ. åovek postaje rob greha. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku. Grigorije Niski. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha. sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. 2001: 121. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine. . veñ teæi da je zavede. 1979: 59. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. 1979: 60. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom.76 Teoloãki åasopis. åini to sa naporom. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. bolu.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. Romanidis. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda. U moralnom smislu. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. 2001: 40. starosti i na kraju smrti. Vidi: Sv. Vidi: Ware.

kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove. 1980: 282. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija. Na osnovu ljudske istorije. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. 2001: 234. pre svega. saåuvala dobrota Boæija. Popoviñ. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. umrli. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. ali. ipak. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. delimiåno slobodna. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. primili smrtnu presudu. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. Romanidis. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. pomraåen i unakaæen. pod tim predpostavkama. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti. posle pada. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. U odnosu na poreklo smrti.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. Da bi se. veñ naprotiv. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. Åovekov Pad: 8. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka.“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. veñ. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. . åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. odnosno.

åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima. 41 42 Rim 1. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. Åak i u palom svetu. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta. meœutim. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta. .20. Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña.42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. po milosti Boæijoj. ali u manjoj meri. a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije. åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten. Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. 62. Apostol Pavle. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. 19 . prema tome. Vidi: Ware. neophodan.78 Teoloãki åasopis. omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom. te mu je. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. na prvi pogled. Boæanski lik u åoveku. Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. odnosno.

imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. Vidi: Justin. prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima.47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307. Po Pelagiju. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. to jest. 110. te. do suprotne krajnosti.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. bez uticaja Boæanskog. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh. åovek moæe biti bez greha. 1980: 300. Nemet. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. Bit praroditeljskog greha. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama. po uåenju Pelagija. greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti. prema tome. Ãtaviãe. do taåke kristalizacije. 46 47 . 2003: 174. Vidi: Courth. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka. dovodeñi ga. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. jer ako je Hrist umro za sve. kako jedni smatraju. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. 108. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto. jer iako moralno nevina.46 a kako drugi smatraju.

Marengo. Vidi: Isto. 2003: 206. i za koju ga.80 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Courth. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. nametnuo svim ljudima.“ 50 Kao takav. Vidi: Scola. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj.“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. premda ga ona uslovljava. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno. . godine u Kartagini. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529.52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha.48 Hiponski biskup.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. Prades. povezano s duãevnom smrñu. godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru. ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi. 114. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti. 1998: 111. 207. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja. govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha. 116. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Isto.

sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku. Takoœe. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja. Vidi. . Vidi: Isto. 120. 1954: 124. koja. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude. na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom. Prades. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu. Isto.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. Vidi: Isto. poåevãi od Adama.56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji. Svaka poæuda. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. 208. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola. Vidi: Fairweather. 121. kao materijalni element. veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. Toma Akvinski. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. 124. Marengo. umrtvljenost ljudske prirode.

Vidi: Popoviñ. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe). kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje.62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. srcem. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. u jeku reformacije. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. 1989: 91.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“. Isto: 96. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada. . po Akvinskom.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu. Vidi: Calvin. 1957: 261. Reformacija U 16. stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom. zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode.82 Teoloãki åasopis. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. i svim njegovim delima. njegovim umom. jer ako jeste. 126. odnosno. 302. pioniri reformacije. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak. veku.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. nakon grehopada povreœena. bez Boæije intervencije. Vidi: Bloesh.

64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). 2007: 50. 1953. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha. i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku. dodavãi pritom. umrli u grehu i robovi greha. niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. osude i mrænje prema Bogu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. Concupiscense. veñ je samo potamnela. ne æele. skloni zlu.68 Takoœe. Barth. . nepoverenja. 1959: 500. veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje.67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka.“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 . i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha. moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu. civilis justitia). 137.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat.htm 66 67 68 Brunner. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia.“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu. Bloesh. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo. cred-texts. odnosno.com/chr/2helvcnf. 94. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. http://www. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“.

kao i imago Dei.“72 Opãta Boæija milost. kako o tome svedoåi 11. za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. Isto. Van Baren. odnosno. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. 1976. ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti. a posebno Kalvinizma. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena.70 Nasuprot tome. 50. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti. Herman. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom. . Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh. Dakle. joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo.84 Teoloãki åasopis.

i tako dok neãto åini. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. ipak. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom. iz Boæijeg ugla. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. Åitav åovek je biser. 50. ali ne i Boga. pa samim tim.. Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. . odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. 95. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve. Donald Bloã. Bloesh. pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo.. i naprotiv. 91. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina. ali nije uniãten. ona neprihvatljiva. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja. savremeni protestanski teolog.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. i zadræati ga u nepravdi.75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. Bloesh. govorio je Luter. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima.“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. naruãen je.

godine. Na saboru je 17.83 U 6. Nemet. prema tome. Apostola Pavla. U 4. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor. kanonu crkveni oci.84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama. izmeœu 1545-1563. 184. Isto. 141. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. Vidi: Courth. Italija. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. veka. 2003: 180. sledeñi Sv. Waterworth: 1848. 21.79 U 2. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca. J. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu.86 Teoloãki åasopis. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. sredinom 16. . Vidi: Nemet. 21. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima.80 U 3. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. Vidi: Courth. 140. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije. naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo.82 Krãtenje. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. U 5. veñ potomstvom i poreklom. juna 1546.78 U 1.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“. i poåetkom 20.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. ålan 37. 143. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. Vidi: Nemet. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma.87 U 37. godine.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto. 185. veka. Vidi: Humani Generis. Vidi: Isto. Takoœe. ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. 2003. naizgled suprostavljene strane. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta. ålan 36. u 36. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. primera radi. ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve. odnosno Adam.86 Joã 1950. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. . Tako se. razvoja prirodnih nauka.

ålan 399. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto. zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode.“90 Takoœe.88 Teoloãki åasopis. Vidi: Isto. 1982: 111. otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. zatvorio Papa Pavle VI. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim. ali bez Boga.91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru. velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka.1965. godine. . koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha. ålan 398. Rahner. izmeœu svetlosti i tame. biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve. ålan 400.92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog. Vidi: Isto. Isto. ålan 13.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti. da bude pred Bogom. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes. 1993: ålan 397.

newadvent. Catholic Encyclopedia. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. 2003: 189.htm Vidi: Isto.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke. ålan 402. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena. Nemet. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha.98 Drugim reåima. Niske pobude suprotne razumu. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh. 98 99 .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen. odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo.99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte. iako je oãteñena. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija. http://www. 96 97 Vidi: Isto. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. ålan 405. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh. odnosno. Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense. ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu. moæe. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve.org/cathen/04208a. u buduñnosti.

M 1954. Fairweather. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. The Institutes of the Christian Religion. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press. Karl 1959. The Westiminster Press. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. The Humanity of God Richmond. Donald 1989. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. . Barth. Brunner. O stvaranju åoveka. Emil 1953. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. F. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia. John 1957. A. Dau 1921. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh.90 Teoloãki åasopis. Grigorije Niski. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Concordia Publishing House. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. Bloesh. Courth. Franc 1998. MI. Sveti 2001. Donald 1989.VA: John Knox Press. T. Grand Rapids. Bente and W. Calvin. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova. G. H. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Krãñanska antropologija. Lutheran Church St. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. G. Louis.

Åovjek kao osoba. Van Baren 1976. Ladislav 2003. Karl 1982. Rahner. Prades 2003. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. Marengo. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. Manastir Kelije. Justin 1980. Manastir Kelije. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Popoviñ.org Romanidis. Justin 1980. Popadiñ. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1. Scola. Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619. Herder & Herder. Beograd. Herman.verujem. Novi Sad: Beseda.verujem. Beograd. Miliñ. Serafim nd. New Ed. www. Isidor 2003. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Osijek. Teologija stvaranja. .org Nemet. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan. Tudoran. Åovekov Pad. Jasmin. Jovan 2001. Dimitrije 2007. Fundations of Christian Faith.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Popoviñ. adresa: www. Zagreb. Zagreb. Praroditeljski greh. Rouz. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’.obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. Espin. vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck. New York... uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha. Madden. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog.nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti. ovako izneta. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom. s jedne strane. William. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu. Springer. koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Kathryn and Marlan.. AltaMira Press.4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica. 5 . 2007. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. definicija religijske vere. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. 1851: 180).5 dok Hil. Lanham. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. Stanton. David.. naroåito internet. Vidi: Leeming.’’ (Nickoloff. 1998. dok bi sa druge. 2009. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. Vidi: Swatos. godine. do islama..

ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn. Knitter. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. Daniel. 1995: 34). 1996.6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema.98 Teoloãki åasopis. Thomas. u ovom trenutku. je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. Faith. na æalost. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava.veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Biblija. tako. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. po sebi. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå. a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. Madges. Jeff. kojom se Bog otkriva. Gospod je.. 1953: 113). time. plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan. Freedom and Rationality. kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip. od uopãtavanja. druãtvu i istoriji. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli. dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. odnosto. 1997: 3). religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. Howard – Snyder. Ne smemo. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. . Pateñi. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera.. Lanham. zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom.

kako vidimo. Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. usinovljenju. posveñenja i ljubavi. 1. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom. 5.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. doktrinarna vera.3). spasenju. 2. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. 1979: 1). Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. Biblijska vera. crkvi i sl. znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja.. 1. Ona je potpuno poverenje u . 29). spasavajuña vera. dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. 6). Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. 2001: 19). Istine o Svetoj Trojici. Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. opravdavajuña vera. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd. biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. koje se sastoji od pouzdanja. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja. Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte.vera je vrsta miãljenja. 3. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1. 15. veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. 4. Purswell. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl. vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja.. posredniåka vera. 1999: 307). odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem.

Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu. 2. dovodi nas do Boga. 7). kao izvora Pravde. Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. 1 – 3). ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev. otkrio Sebe svetu. mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna. 2. 10. On je. dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim.100 Teoloãki åasopis. tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal.php . milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere. Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. kroz Reå. Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao. 7 Vidi: http://www. Ta vera je jasna. 11). 5. ka ljudskom biñu. kroz Logos – Sina. 11. ãto je krucijalno. N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda. stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo.com/biblical_faith. 20). veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev. Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. 23). Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo. 10.greatbiblestudy. Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine.

ali je svuda prisutan. vaæno. ãto je. ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi. i æivot. automatski. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. ona je i poverenje. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor. 1976: 132). åak. i izabrani) i . Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. episkop Amfilohije. onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih.. dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. naravno. 1964: 87). i ljubav. Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. 1996: 3). a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3. Ljubav. koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. sve zna. nije samo oseñanje. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. sve moæe. 1974: 20). i nada. u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno. primarno.. Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere.’’ (Snyder. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. veñ zbog opãteg dobra. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. sve vidi. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju. 13). po Pismu. o svemu brine.

Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir. na veru kao instrument sluæenja. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. a elementi su: Biblija. Dar vere. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. 8 Vidi: Horton. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. vizionarski i interventni. kako za pastoralnu. The Gifts of the Spirit. molitve. Nottingham. Dar vere. . N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. slavljenje i sl. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost.102 Teoloãki åasopis. i dara vere. dok je dar vere specifiåan. koji su jednako vaæni. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. Harold. b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. Bez njih. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. takoœe. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. po sebi. prvenstveno. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. 1934. Assembly of God Publishing House. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. propoved. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha.

jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje. a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima. Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Ali. te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’.9 U svom 22. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. u potpunosti je spasen. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. i Baynard. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. naãu pravednost. U sluåaju poslednjeg. 2008. ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. Stoga. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. Chuck Baynard. Dakle. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. 2008. 10 . 2008. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. Chuck. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. 28). s pravom. Zato. Tordinci.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. 3. poãteno govoreñi. s Pavlom. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. Tordinci.

poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. a moæda. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. Hristos ili jeste. i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo. 11. zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. verom. iznad svega. istrajnost i trpeljivost.. Dakle.’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. Posredstvom Svetog Duha. do potpune predanosti Bogu. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja. N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost. postajemo opravdani verom. ali i tek zapoået. pravednost i ljubav. Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista.. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha. pak. ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. ’’ . (Jev. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. Zato. a po volji Svetog Oca. 1). Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere.104 Teoloãki åasopis. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot. niti oduzeti – On je put.

Chuck Baynard.. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Wm. God. B. 2008. theology of gifts. Berkhof. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. Bible. 1979. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje. Hendrikus. gift of faith. Christian Faith. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. Tordinci. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Holy Spirit. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people. Grand Rapids. Also. 2008. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. Christ. . the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. Key words: Religion. Chuck. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. belief.

Lanham. William. 1996. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Wayne. Eileen. 2001. Peter. Irving. Paul and Madges. Bible Doctrine. Mystic. Louisville. Grudem. 1851. Vanc couver. . Sremski Karlovci. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske. Religion and Theology. Twenty – Third Publications. 1999. Christian Faith. 1995. Charles. Flynn. Hill. Hexham. Zondervan. Regent College Press. Flynn. Charles. Thomas. Carroll. Jeff. N° 9 Buck. Gloria. 1974. Crissy & Markley. Concise Dictionary of Religion. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. Episkop Danilo. Grand Rapids. 2009. Brennan. Hodgson. Philadelphia. Knitter. A Theological Dictionary. Biblio Life. Westminster John Knox Press. Everett. episkop Amfilohije. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. Encyclopedia Britannica. Living Faith. Charleston. 2007. 1999. Purswell. Victor Books. 1997.106 Teoloãki åasopis. Wheaton. Faith. The psychological elements of religious faith. Leslie.

Edwin.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. Downers Grove. Lewis. Swatos. London. David. Stott. John. Stanton. Grand Rapids. The Problem of Wine Skins. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. Espin. Howard. Springer. 1954. James. 2009. 1964. Marlineau. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. 1953. Baptism and Fullness. . 1976. Harold. Liturgical Press. Downers Grove. Philadelphia. izdavaå nepoznat. Inter – Varsity Press. 1888. Schaff. Westminster Press. Nickoloff. Nottingham. A Study of Religion. Baker Book House. Snyder. 2007. Collegeville. Inter – Varsity Press. James. 1998. Lanham. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. New York. Kathryn and Marlan. Assembly of God Publishing House. Leeming. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. AltaMira Press. William. Madden. The Gifts of the Spirit. 1934. Philip. Orlando.

2010 Prihvañeno: 05. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified. philosophy of science. theology of God. . revelation. In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God. taken for granted. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk.04. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01. biblical theology. the identity of God. rationality. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis. God talk. religious studies. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge. God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible.04. a popular approach to religious studies today. to a certain degree.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology.

which guarantees scientific objectivity. The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. Buddhism and Hinduism. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration. unidentified and. Above the line. From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. The arrow. under the line. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. All that there is under the line is what matters. This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. Islam. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical. on a second row. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. a line was drawn. they all have a holy book. by consequence unhistorical entity. from the respective religion. an exceptional figure and a God. The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. points only in one direction. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. Judaism. from bottom up. books were drawn. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. God exists as an undefined. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way. and humans of all that is physical. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical. the name was written of a key figure. after all. at the bottom of the board. Above the books. since its analysis is objective. above the line the word God was posited. The ul- .110 Teoloãki åasopis. In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. Above these figures. as the one who provides access to God. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience.

and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. ever-present etc. has a history. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective. theology. It is no longer a talk about God as such. taking into account the above criticism. This is precisely the underlying principle. In the face of this criticism I. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. faceless. God is defined as a distant. as a theologian. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’.e. in terms of divinity. God is a generic term. all-knowing. It is a God with no history. i. In history. God is not just a general concept. can be called upon and thus. God is a projection of the human mind. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. mute being who is decorated with superlatives. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. God is . As a Christian theologian. In post-Kantian terminology. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. no people and no places. but has a Name. which stands for ‘a being up there’. The reason is that. can be identified.

It is a classic definition. “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M. These experiences are related to a certain tradition. . will also become more evident. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. Charlesworth. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing. speaking to them and acting in their lives. Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences.J. consequently the identity of God. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. to a certain 1 St. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. The consequent stories. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. God has an identity. According to the anselmian formula. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1965). fides quaerens intellectum. In order to understand what Christian theology is. Anselm. laws.112 Teoloãki åasopis. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. meeting people. songs. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people.

community and talk.” in NDT. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails. . faith. Wright. Theology became more of a system of thought. from the Church into the university. 3 See. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD. one could talk about a separate development in modernity. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church. With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. a scientific discipline. The early church fathers focused. Theology moved. as it were. Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. Rationality. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith. D. and by consequence. “Theology. and specifically with the God-human relationship. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest.. experience. 680.F. a subject taught in the academia.3 In modernity.2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo. in their theology.

. vol. 2002). Theology for the Community of God. On the one hand. Systematic Theology. 5.. 32. 7 McGrath. How shall we get it across. 1. N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology. which God in Jesus Christ has established. A. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community. H.E.. 141. nd . The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline. The Triune God. “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship. R. 6 Jenson.. 2000). they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. Christian Theology. between us and Him. Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap. 2 Ed..W. while on the other hand.”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel.”7 Berkhof. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore.114 Teoloãki åasopis. S. in a language.”4 “Basically. 1997). 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question. The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity. Christelijk Geloof. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters. (Oxford: Oxford University Press. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith. An Introduction. J. 1. pleading it before him and praising him for it. 4 5 e Grenz. (Oxford: Blackwell. 1997).

2002). it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails. the content of faith. in the academy or in the public square. but also about God himself. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. (Nijkerk: Callenbach.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions.e. Van de Beek. In short. and. i. Second.God and ‘logos’ . The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith. in community with others. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . 1982). God kennen – met God leven. theology. 2.e.. Theology in other words is talk about God. theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline. A. To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. God. It may be in the church. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God. But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. New Edition. K.10 rather.word of or about God. Third. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. theology happens in relationship with a faith community. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. by implication. the content of theology. i. there are some common features that unite them: first. for it finds its roots and ends in her. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter. the Church..

the Church through the ages. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’.116 Teoloãki åasopis. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name. It is right. theology is also talk about the world and humanity. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God. i. On a fundamental level. To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space. This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. To formulate this in a question: who is this God. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms.e. Later. . It implies a certain way of talking about God. but the contrary is true. in Christian thinking. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. This is not only an individualistic endeavor. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. because in a certain sense. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. and can also be addressed. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition.e. the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question. namely talk about God. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives. i. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics.

11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion. To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God. Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible. . we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H. The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible. Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. in theology. Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives. Adriaanse. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology. to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology.J. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001.

Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. formal and systematic.R. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience. Popper. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. 1963). The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. (London: Routledge.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today. Conjectures and Refutations.118 Teoloãki åasopis. and is seen by some as the bearer in . knowledge and rationality. He is frequently compared with Kant. 13 K. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science.

the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. . Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. 14 Popper.” A. Kant’s Critique.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. that is. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here.1. In it we find a certain correlation between.14 Throughout history. 3-6. on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch. what was considered science. As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. and see if they survive. Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology. O’Hear (ed.) Karl Popper. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. 2004). as a discipline. but also the method of acquiring knowledge. vol. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification. Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes. we should abandon them. and the shape of theology in the twentieth century. If they do not.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes. (London: Routledge. in Conjectures. and its ensuing age of rationalism. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science.

Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science. Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism. or conjecture or hypothesis. the truthfulness of Nature. The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism. This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science. or prejudice.16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. Popper. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). By following and contrasting these two. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. False method. in other words it may reveal itself. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science. Conjectures and Refutations. . episteme. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes). Conjectures and Refutations. on the other hand. What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true. which leads to doxa. Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper. “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei. 5. is the anticipation of the mind. or superstition. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”. by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. 7. for otherwise God would be deceiving us. Nature is an open book. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it. if not it may be uncovered by human beings.120 Teoloãki åasopis. True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge.

remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. . in Popper’s opinion. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy. but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté.17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. Conjectures and Refutations. which seemed to function. Conjectures and Refutations.17.18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. 15. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. all humans have the source of knowledge in them. i. we ourselves. 17 18 19 20 Popper. 15. Popper. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible. not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities. Conjectures and Refutations. as divine authorities. of our errors and of our ignorance. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). the senses and the intellect were the authorities. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology. Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity. 7. Thus we are split into a human part. and a super-human part. However. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”. and they set them up within each individual man. Popper. the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. Popper. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind.e. such as the senses or the intellect. Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. anti-authoritarianism.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think. Conjectures and Refutations.

Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. Popper. 178.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent. the Critique of Pure Reason. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set.122 Teoloãki åasopis. as the most prolific figure of this period. the last couple of centuries. Conjectures and Refutations. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities. not to lack of intelligence. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. Kant. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. has had a major influence on contemporary theology. 175. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment. Conjectures and Refutations. The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. Nature or God. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions. . Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious. If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment. Kant made the next step. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader.

Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper. …The doctrine of autonomy . Kant’s second step.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’. this means that there is no outside authority. “Kant humanized ethics. Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature. but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important. Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. Conjectures and Refutations. In Kant’s critique of religion. but imposes its laws upon nature’”. but an inductive knowledge. however exalted. . i. as he had humanized science. Popper. Beyond that. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head.24 In other words. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. is the humanization of knowledge. They can.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority. projection. but only in the human intellect. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. in Popper’s analysis. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space. however.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics.e. It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper observes the following. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. as the ultimate basis of ethics”. 179. Popper. 180. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. 181. He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview. the human being becomes a free agent.

knowledge and rationality. and to worship Him”. Experience. Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. In our view. but projects his or her own God. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. . 182. Conjectures and Refutations. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology. The free human being. in order to worship him as your creator. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you.124 Teoloãki åasopis. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way. 26 Popper. is at the heart of modern theology. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason.

for Adriaanse. of a certain Gehalt (C) (content). we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience. is not only about the “how”. H. C. specifically to the various theories of knowledge. He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. from the author of revelation (A). Rationality. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E). It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality.. Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation. (Kampen: Kok.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. From the perspective of: the author (A). But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation. or the methodology of knowledge. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation.. In the problematisation of revelation.28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation. “Offenbarung. 28 Schwöbel. 1988) 7. In what follows.J. II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467. but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science. knowledge and rationality.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience. 4 . who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work. in the revelatory situation (B). The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse.

in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B). Firstly. The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). and at the same time. There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). In the Middle Age. In theological terms. However. At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason. reveals Himself. and enables its execution (E). this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God.126 Teoloãki åasopis. makes the truth of the message certain. In a nutshell. (in Christ-atoned). It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. Secondly. His will and His character. The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship. His creatures. if there is any. between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. then what is the . yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. the almighty Creator (A). since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. is the content of revelation (C). Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans.

29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings. There was no distinct subject and object relationship. God. vol I. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt.. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation. K. Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans. 1932-1938). By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. and therefore 29 Schleiermacher. . Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible. (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God.]. F. 30 Barth.D. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. Both theologians answered these questions in their own way. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth. So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”.30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human. (Berlin: De Gruyter. As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God.[reprint of the 1831 ed. 2003).E..

e. i. This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology. The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. reception of the revelation. can one still rationally justify. .128 Teoloãki åasopis. meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it. but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. because it ought to be present on the public square. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans. or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. First. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline. public. as widely accessible as possible. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk. It is not a private matter.

they must be a well defined part of it. as accurate as possible.. Finally..32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts.A. H. 32 Adriaanse. one should be able to see.J. . Second. Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. and particularly not contradictory statements. scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality. taste. rather. only with a part of it. 1987) 54-56. touch. measure and so on.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’. Since theories are claims about reality. b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe. in other words. scientific theories must be verifiable. Het verschijnsel theologie. there is also the how of scientific theories. Krop. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory.. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. L. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole. logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory. Leertouwer. H. These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. and preferably non-contradictory in nature. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie.

54-56. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly. having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. in the sense which is universally valid. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. repeatability is not possible. Adriaanse. what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. . Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. Het verschijnsel theologie. one might come across one more point. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. The reason is that. When events happen only once. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened.130 Teoloãki åasopis. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. one assumes that he or she may know the past). To formulate this in a question. N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. However. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested. These methodological considerations bring us to our next point.

zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. van Gennep en W. is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific. red. 9.34 Revelation. t.36 This very objectification of God is impossible. God is the object of theology. rijksuniversiteit. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. according to Adriaanse. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific. E.O. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. H. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology. The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. Flesseman-van Leer.g.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself. .v. 35 Adriaanse. H. en uitgeg. F.15. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions. We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology.. rijksuniversiteit. dr. Verdonk. 1981). E.

38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. the condition for accuracy is also impossible. 57-63. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God. if God created the world good. . it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. However. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories. is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline. namely consistency. 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. evil is hard to explain consistently). in reality it is much harder. or presupposition of atheism. They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy. which is needed. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science.e.g. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole. Het verschijnsel theologie. 38 Adriaanse. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i.132 Teoloãki åasopis. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy. considering issues related to theodicy (e. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. then why is there evil? Good vs. however.

Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. And third. he qualifies its object. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. but only about ‘God. Second. if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. adaptation. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. it has to fall under general religious studies.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline. rather. This constant growth.’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. is in a situation of crisis. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. in order to be able to maintain any standing. The question is: what is the way forward. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. Historically. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities. probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. Theology thus. In modern times. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content. presented by the scientific developments. God. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. as understood in the classical sense.

one can only ask about religion. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. It is a shift from theology to anthropology. This turn. Since 1876. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination. The general tension between religious science and theology remains. one religion among other religions. Het verschijnsel theologie. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse.’ Thus. Religious philosophy.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. . This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. during this century. the public universities function as duplex ordo. N° 9 mind. to the subject. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts. church history under the general department of history. all that remains is talk of human religiosity. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. scientifically. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands. closely related to religious science. practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God.134 Teoloãki åasopis. Christianity. also finds its roots in this age. This is a significant move. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences.’ Therefore. Since the Enlightenment. 63.

This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. By consequence it is religious anthropology. This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people. rather. this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’. 89-96. as is the case with dogmatics. Het verschijnsel theologie. God. Adriaanse. Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse.e. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality. The focus. is impossible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other. Theology in this sense is about religion. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. Adriaanse. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion. . Het verschijnsel theologie.40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse.73. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’. In philosophical terms. 63. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. Het verschijnsel theologie.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible. in theology. i. a divinity. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division.

Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. By using the term ‘identity’. He argues that. Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church. is impossible. One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. H. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. Essentially. Adriaanse has a concept of God. The reason is that God. N° 9 God. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’. To answer Adriaanse’s challenge. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. as such. is a non-academic discipline. but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’. Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test.J. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective. which is . We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being.136 Teoloãki åasopis. theology defined as talk about God.

address. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives. i. God talk. judging people and restoring them. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. talks to them.e.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. there He is as well. His people’s history is His history as well. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. He does things like saving people. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. The Name. the biblical narratives about YHWH. God has an identity and is not merely a definition. ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans. That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection. which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. is a reminder of this very truth. for Adriaanse. It is by grace that He enters .e. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. This is precisely the problem. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. acts and moves. but the God who is identified in the history of His people. He does not simply exist: He acts. We understand that theology pertains to this God. i. theologically speaking. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. YHWH. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. in their history. YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes. The word ‘God’. He appears to people. The Shema.

We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed. Just like a married couple. This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. but we who have heard also talk about God. humanity and the world. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. YWHW. which tell of God and who He is. by being in relationship they are one. touched and defined by this God. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity.138 Teoloãki åasopis. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. Even though they are two different people. The history of Israel. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. attaches His identity to them. the participants become one and share the same history. N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. The texts give voice to those human experiences. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God. . by participating in the lives of His people. as not being God talk.

E. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. trans. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. . 1982. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Oxford: Clarendon Press. t. F. Nijkerk: Callenbach. H. vol I.. Berkhof. 1981. Charlesworth. Barth. Het verschijnsel theologie. 1932-1938 Edition. K.. L.O. Leertouwer. H. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. red.g.v. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. Flesseman-van Leer. Barth. H. Proslogion: 1965. Kampen: Kok. Anselm. Adriaanse..A. E. A. Krop.. en uitgeg. H..J. 2002. Beek van de. God kennen – met God leven. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. 1988. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. 1987.. H.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse. Verdonk. M. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. Nijkerk: Callenbach..J. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen. K.. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. van Gennep en W.J. dr. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom.

Grenz. (ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.. Schwöbel.. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. 2002. N° 9 Berkhof. vol. McGrath. Berlin: De Gruyter. S. vol. Theology for the Community of God. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Jenson. [reprint of the 1831 ed. 2000.. Christelijk Geloof. “Offenbarung. Schleiermacher. 1963..R. An Introduction. F.. 1997. Kampen: Kok.E. London: Routledge. R.D.140 Teoloãki åasopis..]. K.) Karl Popper. 8e druk. Popper. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 2004..W. Systematic Theology. Oxford: Blackwell. H. 1997. O’Hear.1. London: Routledge. A.. A. Conjectures and Refutations. Christian Theology. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI . 2003. The Triune God.E. C.. 1. J. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. 2nd Ed.

This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups. Ethnicity. However. Peace-building. Conflict. Religious Anthropology.991(497. Mostar. Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. One. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. Evangelical Church. Reconciliation. Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar. This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups. Key words: Religion. Bosnia and Hercegovina. reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church. However. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. Identity. . there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts.

The first reason is related to the current global political situation. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis. Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group. or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. where I did my research. However.142 Teoloãki åasopis. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. 2006). The terrorist attacks on New York. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. I will make it explicit. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. . but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process. Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik. At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. People from Herzegovina. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians.

Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world. been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale. I think it is impossible to draw . either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world. for centuries. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building. This act of destruction changed what had. In the church where I did my research. no defined membership exists. I have chosen to do my research in a small church. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not.

In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church. • How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? .144 Teoloãki åasopis. five sub-questions need to be looked at. Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. Nevertheless. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general. Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts. This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. As I said. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. like I said before. bible studies and worship meetings. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders. . This has to do with the demographic composition of the church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. 4 Usually. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services. Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. The older people in church are mostly women and. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. relatively many foreigners came to church. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. drinking coffee or just walking on the street5. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. youth meetings. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level.

These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. Apart from practical advantages. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. and identity construction.150 Teoloãki åasopis. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. 1999: 67). Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. further strengthen essentialist ideas. N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. A policeman will not fine one of his friends. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. Religion. One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. Identity politics. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. It also widened the gap between groups. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. Religions are often being divided along strict lines. People feel safe in the street when they . they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann. In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity.

Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. Children from mixed marriages. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories. When I asked a person about his ethnicity. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. If a person for example believes in life after death. is large in Mostar. as Baumann calls them. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. Muslim and Evangelical identity.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. (Baumann. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. Croatian culture. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. 1995: 198). With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. or ‘eccentrics’. The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. or Croatian identity. but still many people do. I will separately discuss Croatian. 1999: 64).

It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical. On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups. For example. The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division. Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. Serbs. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town.152 Teoloãki åasopis. The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. the east . Nearly all Serbs had fled the city. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. N° 9 not make any sense.

These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. All bridges across the Neretva. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . 106). Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. The city was turned into a depressive scene. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. 2002: 108).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. The character of the city had changed tremendously. Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. 2002: 105. The same can be said of many institutions. An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system. but this was not much more than a formality. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines. although pupils can choose for ethics instead. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. 2002: 112). It breathed death and destruction. Croatian history and have catholic religious classes. The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. which function as separate bodies. The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. he and his family lived in Mostar. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier. The television was always turned on very loud. His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. During the war. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. He became a Christian after the war. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. Altogether it was just enough to get by. The house they lived in was only half finished. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. According to Boris.158 Teoloãki åasopis. whom she met in Mostar. Although his father had been a religious leader. Boris did not believe in Islam. . They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. Costs of living are not so high. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. A good example is Boris. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. although nobody was really watching.

His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam. mainly through humanitarian aid. They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. . they have a marginal position in this community. I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian.

even at night. When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match.160 Teoloãki åasopis. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe. During my stay Pope John Paul II died. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. when it is illuminated. On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours. The 50. the opposite is true for West Mostar. . Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. at least among most Catholics. On the whole. N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar.

In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. Half of my family is Orthodox. or I don’t hate Serbs. I don’t hate Muslims. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996. . Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. because it would cause big problems within their family. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. Helena is an interesting example. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. I hang around with both.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian. Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. but I am glad that I am Croatian. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. Therefore. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group. I have a Croatian Passport. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday.

This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches. although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. The church has no official membership. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. For example. However. There is no Baptist church in Mostar.162 Teoloãki åasopis. 1995). It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. other young people only come to worship meetings on . Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. As I have said before. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. for many individuals it is not so clear. all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion. others only came to one particular kind of meeting. The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard. I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community. Some people come to almost every meeting. During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity.

sometimes only a handful show up.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. Bosnian Croats. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. Kosovo Albanians. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. In each of the buildings meetings are being held. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar. Significantly. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims. Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. Sometimes 25 people come. On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. Many of the refugees are illiterate. People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education. 13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. .

Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning. though to a lesser degree. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs.164 Teoloãki åasopis.A.org/page4. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U. or both of the parents come to church.. Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. but also in the Brankovac church. called Novi Most. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries. The way a service is organised. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation. Most of the time only those come of whom one. come for a short period to Mostar.S. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. the songs that are sung.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U.. In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. The vision statement of one of these organisations.html .A.novimost. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. the way in which people pray. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’. 14 http://www. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years.S. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations.

Often being outside of . are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network. People have told me that in the past this was more often the case. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church. In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church. The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do. During and in the first few years after the war. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. Muslims see baptism as a really big step.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. 2003). many people came to church because of material benefits. It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. In this period many people stopped coming to church. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family.

who wore . like refugees. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. it seems obvious. People that were marginalized in Mostar. But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar. There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. It also makes people part of a larger international network. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. This brings material benefits. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. Another contradictory example is Mehmed. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. an old Bosnian Muslim man. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. For some groups.166 Teoloãki åasopis. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. She had kept it a secret for a long time. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom. Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. Her mother was shocked by the news. Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation. Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism. they also benefit from the presence of many international people. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me. If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved. Nevertheless. people do have freedom to make personal choices. The west side . viable peace is impossible.

In an interview I asked Ivan. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. The Christian symbol of the cross. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar. you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. .168 Teoloãki åasopis. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church. He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. for example is not used in this church. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims. ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar.

reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together. . In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. This is an interesting comparison. For the church this is too much a political matter. This is seen as a spiritual goal. For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity.” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church. In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process.

but also Kosovo Albanians. In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. .170 Teoloãki åasopis. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. Gypsies and Serbs. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church. Because of its clarity. Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right. An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. At almost all activities that I visited. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church.

but they did not have a central role during the meetings. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. For all those who had a leading position in the church. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. the church more and more defines one’s identity. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. As one becomes part of the church. Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats. Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. but that they just did not have so much contact with them. Ethnicity is part of the old identity. There are several factors that explain this. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. be- . Secondly. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims. This determines the majority of their relationships. It was a topic that was not spoken about much. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. Marco. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. the less the importance of ethnicity. ethnicity played a minor role. The longer they are evangelical Christian. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present.

172 Teoloãki åasopis. On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. In many ways this was a difficult task. People from different groups talk with each other. They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. I only spent four months in Mostar. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. The longer a person is part of the church. N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives. During my research this pattern began to change. Like I said. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. . Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. they pray with each other and for one another. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people.

It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. However. A good example is Dijana. She helps out with the youth work. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. Some people. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town. However. people also stay part of other social networks. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group. I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family. In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims. have become part of a very diverse social network. Except from some British and Americans. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. The church does not have much impact on these relationships. Her friends are mainly people from church. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . who have been going to church for a long time. They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town.

The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card. Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. As far as I know. Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives.174 Teoloãki åasopis. No one can completely avoid it. Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. He told me that the previous night. also in the lives of evangelical Christians. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. Amir never took revenge. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men. which he did not have. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. when he was walking around in West Mostar. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The following anecdote shows this. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. despite his anger. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. He loves going to these worship meetings. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed.

The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people. In many ways the . In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other. This does of course not mean that they always will. but it does influence behaviour.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background. At the same time there is also a change in convictions. So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. What is left now is the empty pedestal. but evangelical. although it is not one of it’s objectives. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this. This is also the case for church people. their lives and their social networks. the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. This is mostly also a gradual process. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual.

Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church. the evangelical community defines their new identity. For those people church offers a local community. When people join the church. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made. Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. this is a striking phenomenon. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical . In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project.176 Teoloãki åasopis. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself.

In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. However.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet. but in order to worship their God.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. Many of these efforts are fruitless. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. yet in a more unplanned way. Many of the people . The people who come to church have common interests in going to church. They benefit from coming to church in various ways. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background. Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. People from different ethnic background come together.However. First of all they find a strong community. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. This makes integration a very difficult objective. The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups. would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church.

Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. Thirdly. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. Church provides a local community and furthermore. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making. The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. the church is part of a trans-national network. Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. I do not think that is the case. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised.178 Teoloãki åasopis. in the process of becoming part of a church. Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. people’s convictions change. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities. However . People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way.

and Geschiere P. Rethinking National. B. Oxford: Berg. pp. 305-324. Boissevain. Berger. A.) 1994. 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. (ed. The Anthropology of Europe. In: Meyer. A. Bax.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. and Religious Identities London: Routledge. M. Th. (eds. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities. Baumann.L. . and Luckmann. G. pp. P. S.). In: Goddard. 41-56. Ethnic. P. Bose. V. J. Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics.L. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. Bibliography Appadurai. Berger.

1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way.180 Teoloãki åasopis. Manuel A. J. York: Basic Books. A. 2000 Bosnia. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. H. L. Eriksen. M. Zaitchik. Lifton. . G. Kelly. T. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. Chandler. (ed. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. and Sheppard.com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon.) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. T. N° 9 Bringa. D. Vásquez. R. April 2006. (1995). 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. URL:http://reason. and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred. Lambek.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .182 Teoloãki åasopis.

03.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr. and all vocations. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole. society.2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 . incomparable. “There are no commonplace. Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. and ineffable. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage. In himself. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr. all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance.96"20" Primljeno: 25. education.2010 Prihvañeno: 30. or anything else. thought. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being.C e n t u r y In this 21st century. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation.. that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth.”1 Fr. in the words of the Nicene Creed.” God made but is utterly different from his creation. And within it..03. All else came into being only by his creative activity. Orthodoxy confesses. and of all things visible and invisible. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible.. Yelchaninov’s designation). One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said. with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom.

God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp. This was true for all of creation. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed.8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God. moves.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop.” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work. in his energies. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden. “the visible and the invisible”. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. life. and future in the God who made and sustained it. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us. offering all the wonders of creation.5 The cosmos only had meaning. but only in him.184 Teoloãki åasopis. to God’s praise. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities. in his essence. in its future development. John of Damascus taught. and has its being. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. as St. Orthodoxy—fol- . under the leadership of his human vice-regents. is utterly transcendent is. But it still had to develop.6 As both St.9 since it was complete and harmonious. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation. absolutely immanent. the material and the immaterial. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God.2 And yet. It was “very good. human beings participated in both realms. Humanity was to serve as priests. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Composed of body and soul. it was true also for humanity. The one who. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation.7 As God’s image-bearers. By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers. in philosophical terminology. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself.

15 Eventually. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension. as one of their descendants. all to the glory of the Creator. down through history—were to work in a gentle. and we have filled our mouths with sand. human beings would themselves develop. influence. In so doing. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter. service. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power. in which everything is always in process of change and development. and took their descendants with them.11 But our first parents. . Adam and Eve. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. Basil the Great and St. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. but the divine one.16 God’s Son. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. our first parents—and their descendants. a champion who would overcome evil. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history. and love: created in the divine image. society. loving. depending thus on what had no life in itself. The creation should develop over time. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. they fell into death. bringing out all its latent possibilities. the second person of the Trinity. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government.14 The garden has become a desert. Seeking the most of our brief life. In dependence on and faithful communion with God.13 Through subsequent human history. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed.12 In so doing.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation. or possessions).

Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life. in this life and on this earth. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world. If any of this strikes you as new. But. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr. and the Eucharist. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation. since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. though: it offered hope for all of creation. in coming as fully human. in order to break its power over others. if so. but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. death. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings. on this earth. in his resurrection. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. its liturgy. In uniting humanity and deity. The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. Alexander Schmemann urges. and “the Word became flesh. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential.19 St.18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century. Christ yielded to what had no power over him. in all they do. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory.186 Teoloãki åasopis. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. I can only beg your indulgence. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day.

we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. all to God’s glory. economics. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity. art. medicine. sport. and in all places. business. government. Whatever humankind may manage to develop. music. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. no section of life. Even so. consequently. from an Orthodox perspective. he remains ever transcendent. literature. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. As we live. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. needs to be studied and taught as his. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. . redeemed and restored in Christ. In all our labors and learning. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created. science. There is nothing—no realm of scholarship. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. Thirdly.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. politics. All comes from him. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. in every day. technology. In the first place. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. depends on him—and. the sciences. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. consequently. Secondly.

taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. as medical researchers or politicians. we can honor Christ in all areas of life. An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. as leaders in society or as followers.188 Teoloãki åasopis. Thank you. Thus. I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. . as chemists or homemakers. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians. from an Orthodox perspective. as political scientists or factory workers.

Basil the Great. Maximos Confessor. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. 2d ed.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1.19. and St. 11-14. and St. 1974). John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos]. The Triads. St. Gregory Palamas. Acts 17:28. 6. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. St. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. St. trans. Gregory of Nyssa. and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being.8. A Study of Gregory Palamas. Fedotov. St. . 16) and St. Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. Oratio 38: 11. 206-207. cf. 1988). Fr. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 1974). John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. 256. 7. In him was life (John l:3-4a). A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt. 5. Alexander Yelchaninov. John of Damascus. see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press. 4. 2:3. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis. and Oratio 45:7. the treatment in John Meyendorff. as cited in George P. Cf the declaration of St. The Orthodox Faith 2:12. 2. George Lawrence (Crestwood. 3. New York: St. 1:3. St. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. Gregory the Theologian. on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. De variis difficilibus locis..

image was understood as given in creation. Cyril of Jerusalem. “And the Lord God commanded the man. and over the birds of the air. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). 10. who was with her.. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. 60. “Then God said. “God saw everything that he had made. ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”. 13. according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26). and she also gave some to her husband. in the image of God he created them. but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. and indeed. N° 9 8. 11. According to St. but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. St. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). 2 above). and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. 9. and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17. and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea. “But the serpent said to the woman. Homily 5. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron. Ch. She took of its fruit and ate. the discussion in John Meyendorff. male and female he created them. “Then God said. in the same vein. it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). cf. and over the cattle. God blessed them and God said to them. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium. and fill the earth and subdue it. and over all the wild animals of the earth. 12. 3:4-6).. among the Greek fathers.. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- .. St. Byzantine Theology (as in n. 43).’ So God created humankind in his image. according to our likeness. St.. 132-134. ‘Let us make humankind in our image.. Anastasius of Sinai said. ‘Be fruitful and multiply. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”. ‘Let us make humankind in our image. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers.190 Teoloãki åasopis.

John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. specifically citing St. 113. In response to what had transpired. cf.g. 1989). “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman. rightly understood. Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. and St. and between your offspring and hers. In his Byzantine Theology (as in n. God declared. New York: St. John Chrysostom. Fr.. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. in this work. 17. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 18. 134). 96-107. 7 above). As well. Gregory Palamas (144-145). St. Gregory the Theologian. 16. St. . St. 123. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15). his Quaestiones ad Thalassium). and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. John 1:14. Theodore of Mopsuestia. God sent his Son. 100. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. The above summarizes the views of St. Theodoret of Cyprus. New Jersey: St. 15. 14. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood. he will strike your head. Cyril of Alexandria. his argument at 21. as do virtually all the Greek fathers. 19. St. Maximos Confessor. Irenaeus. 1973). born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). Theophylact of Ohrid. he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come.

“A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood. New Jersey: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. . “Redemption is a wondrous reality. 1978). Vladimir Lossky urges. in confirmation of this. Lossky cites the statement by St. Gregory the Theologian.192 Teoloãki åasopis. which extends across the entire cosmos” (114).

cultural. Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of . 1 1.” recommended by Charles Van Engen.the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21). ecclesiological and missiological) background . since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence .by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement . 10. .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22. The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself .what I would entitled . the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey.to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications. in this case.which. theological. by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical.that followed the Acts 14:28. By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. the typical summary statement. Likewise.08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph. This is obvious. is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) . geographical.

as a whole. Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes . the preparation for His dead and resurrection. In this perspective. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts .versus Acts alone . 2. which is the preparation for mission. which is the preparation for His ascension. as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council. 3. the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture).194 Teoloãki åasopis. which is. Gospel of Luke. could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church.both. but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council. and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ). the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. Within the gospel of Luke. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context.work. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit. Thus. 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse. the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council . again. Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission. Accordingly.” (29). Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- . Within the Acts. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22.

2. a Jew). most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18. (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. Thus. the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. for example. things strangled. fornication) Apostolic Decree . 2 4. This three-prohibitions ( 1.’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such. blood and 3. things sacrificed to idols. 191.stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). apparently contradictory act. and Tertullian in the early third century). 2. they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. Tannehill 1998. and 4. which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus). since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919. blood.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). . a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council. fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10). things sacrificed to idols. 11. 3.understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature . particularly 17:10. and its four -prohibitions (1. we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. However. is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”.

especially to the rite of circumcision . which are now consisting the Church. In short. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem. I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. thus. by accepting the Gospel of Grace. (Given place. the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over.” and there is no parallel for such a phrase. N° 9 growing community of Gentles. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . verse 7. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ.196 Teoloãki åasopis. Marshall 1983. 255. apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. . The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys. wherever the Church have had its regular meetings. The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. verse 4. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. and to us” (verse 28). and thus it is determined by them. 4 5 Bruce 1983.) 6. versus 12 and 22). The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. I will not discuss this issue. “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). you don’t have to circumsize. Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit. 315. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. and the whole congregation was present. Furthermore. 5.” 4 5 7.

in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. nd rd 10. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. apostles.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8. “who were leaders among the brethren” . Pneumatological.g. The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives. ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. to confirmed that. and the recipients. elders . • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles. by a council.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas. in particular. • We are sending you our elders.and the whole [Jerusalem] church.” (verse 23). There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter. elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e. together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). 26) [and their opinion]. one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally. 9. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. • In that. Ecclesiological. blood and fornication (29). The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- . • The only exceptions has to do with the idols. we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28). Judah and Silas (27).

If authentic . and it will consequently become a humane institution. Acts 15:22-29 has theological.e. Holy Spirit lead and inspired . Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. 12. This is important. . Furthermore. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. If institutionalized. to know how to act when faced with the controversy. In its letter. Gathered for the sake of Christ. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place. it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps. 34.” Verse 24. 253. Harrison 1986. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision.198 Teoloãki åasopis. The church in Jerusalem was well-organized. Implications Accordingly. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. Verse 23. since there was no authorization. a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God. Without an active participation (or. the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. The Church is a properly ordered community. ecclesiological and missiological implications. task-oriented and delegating church. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit. 11.g.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel.” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966.

Grand Rapids: William B. Gerhard A. Krodel. while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement. 288.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament.Eerdmans Publishing Company. Polhill 1992. F. Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained. The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. . 8 9 10 Stott 1990. Krodel 1986.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. They would not only deliver the letter. Vol. New York: Herder and Herder. 1. Kurnizgen.” Verse 28. Everett F. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church. 251. Harisson.27. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support. 335. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. 20).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 . Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House.

Mineapolis: Fortress Press. 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts. David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. New York: Doran. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. John R. Vol 2. Stott. Leicester. Neshville: Broadman Press.200 Teoloãki åasopis. Polhill. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Fuller Theological Seminary. . Tannehill. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B. N° 9 Marshall. W. 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. Paul. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. Smith. Van Engen. I.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus. John B.

eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine. i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29). teoloãke. tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare. Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta. . geografske. kulturne.

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

ko je zgreãio. patnja ili kazna snalazi. Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje. Prihvañeno: 01. zaãto dolazi do bolesti. koji je bio slep od roœenja. Meœutim.03. a i mnogi drugi.predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol. da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani. æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3). danas. Petar Piliñ UDK 234. pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih . Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti. teol. Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh. Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. Meœutim.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint. on.net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca.02.2010 Svetske religije.23:616 Asistent .

Novi zavet. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. na prvom mestu o bolestima. Neki od njih. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. isceljenje. Zatim. Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan. i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem.dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. nakon ãto su se pokajali.su bili isceljeni. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu. demoni. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili. Zato. bolest. Saznavãi za Saru. Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. apostoli. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. U Starom zavetu.204 Teoloãki åasopis. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. jer sam ja Gospod. 32:39). ponovo zdravi. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. i kako bi trebali i danas. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima. lekar tvoj”. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama. ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. 1. Isus Hristos. Postanak 20 . Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra. Uåitelj i Gospod. greh. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja.

bila je bela kao sneg. i to se i dogodilo. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. 2. Meœutim. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. Brojevi 12 . Gospod je pozvao Mariju. Boæiji åovek. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. i æivot njegove porodice. pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. koji. Inaåe. Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. zato mu je Bog dao uslov.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. Dakle. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. Videvãi Mariju. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja. Bog je. Meœutim. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je .govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. neposluãnost. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove. u starozavetno doba. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. Mojsije. da bi åovek ozdravio. Boæiji åovek. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka.

Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. Meœutim. 3. U protivnom. Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. Znaåi. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. svi oni koje su ujedale zmije. . Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje. za bolesnu osobu. 4. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina. Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti. bio je ozdravljen. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. Brojevi 21:5-9 . bez milosti su umirali. Gospod je åuo tu molitvu. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda. Boæijeg åoveka. a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku.206 Teoloãki åasopis. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. 21 . Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija. smilovao se Jezekiji. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti. bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan. Isaija 38:1-5. i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. Inaåe.

Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. Nadalje. 53:4). Ali. bili ozdravljani. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh. . drugim reåima. ãta je radio. 53). Meœutim. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. To je i radio. posledica greha. da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. Dakle. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. 8:46). 4:36). Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. Kada je isceljivao. znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima. ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom.

2. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe. 1. Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je. 989. 5:18-20. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa. . Isus je rekao: åoveåe. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”.208 Teoloãki åasopis. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. jer je to bilo reãenje. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti.2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji. imala je groznicu. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh. opraãtaju ti se gresi.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. 24.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. 4:38. a ne o bolesti. 115. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. Poãto je bila velika guæva. 23. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka. Moris: 1983: str.

Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. 15:25). Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. Tako je i bilo. 4. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. 160. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. . Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. 13:1-5). pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom. Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. ali mu je. Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara. ujedno. Odeljak Lk. Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. 3. 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 6. da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. na koje nije bilo odgovora.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”. 5. Jovana. Luka nam ovde ne kaæe. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. pozvao Isusa da to uåini. Kapetan rimske vojske je. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. na Isusa.

isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. 9.6 7. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. 995. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio. 15:27). 8. Dakle. vera tvoja spasla te je. . Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila. 13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla.5 Naravno. “kñeri. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza. idi s mirom”. 35. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao. 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara. priñi Isusu otvoreno. Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. 52. Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. zbog zakona (Lev. a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima.210 Teoloãki åasopis. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. Ova æena koja nije mogla. Zato. Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa.

Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. . Isus se smilovao na slugu.9 10. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. priãao mu. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. 12. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. videvãi ãta se deãava. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca. komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. Moris: 1983: str. Prilikom isterivanja demona. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. 229. slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda. Slepac je.8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. 1003. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. uzroånika bolesti. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti. 22:50. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. 13. åuvãi da Isus prolazi. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu. poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila. “Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom.

nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih. 10:17-19. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. N° 9 lekarima. jer ja idem k Ocu. Nekada samo isceljuje. verujuñi u Njegovo ime. Meœutim. Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. Zato. verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja. nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. starosti ili nemoñi tela. kaæem vam. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. u Isusovo ime. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. . zaista. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime. naglasak je moj). Stoga. 14:12-14).212 Teoloãki åasopis. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim. Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. i veña od ovih. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. Jvn. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. Takoœe. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. da se dogode i åuda. ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi. Ovo je velika istina. to ñu uåiniti.

i to ne Petrovom senkom. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom. ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje. bili su isceljeni. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio. veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku. 54. Dogaœala su se åuda.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. 1075. stekli su poãtovanje. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele. nego i ozdravlja. Koristeñi Isusovo ime.13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) . 11. Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 2. 75. i reåima i delom. Carson: 1994: str. ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30. propovedala reå. 1073. ili autoritet. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 15. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”. 5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike. Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16. 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . Petar je dao do znanja. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. veñ silom Duha Svetog.14 Zapravo.

12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla. 8:54. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima.16 Drugo. ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. 6:19. 13:13. 17 . Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda. Dl. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. 14:3).7. U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. 22:51. Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane.dela koja ja åinim. Jvn.. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”. 221. 1096. Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16. 2:22 i 10:38). Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. i veña od ovih…”). 9:6. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. Meœutim. 5. 5:12. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 19:11. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. 15. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. N° 9 3.214 Teoloãki åasopis. 4. baã kao i ovde. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija. 5:13. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto. 16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 9:12. 4:40.

19 20 20 . Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. dijagnoze i terapije. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. onda treba da. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. 293. kao i mnoge druge. iako tekst ne govori o tome. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. imao je groznicu i srdobolju. samo ili prvenstveno. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. Samo na ovom putovanju. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. 1106. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu.1199 Meœutim. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. sem fiziåkih. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. 81. Zbog toga. i oni su ozdravljali. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti.

Lk. neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. U I Kor. 5:16. 33. Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. Bog i demonske sile. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. Greh je uzrok bolesti. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. Zato. 1:34. N° 9 Dakle. Mk. Mt. 11:30. Mk. “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti. izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. 8:26-39). 7:21. Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt. Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str. 115.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh.13. 8:16. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt. Lk. 22 23 23 . Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. 12:22. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom. 17:14-21.216 Teoloãki åasopis.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. 9:14-29. 69. Anderson:2002: str. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. Previãe revnih. Kada dr Peter H. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. 9:32-34. 9:37-43). Lk. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. Lk. 8:28-34. 68. 5:1-20. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti. Dl. 8:7). padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje.

218-221. Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin. Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti. Mada. 11). Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti. uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva. Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. Meœutim. Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. lakomstva. U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog. i to je Boæiji dar. 25 . Verujem. U I Kor. Meœutim. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. Varisus (Dl. 5:5. smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti. Bog je uzrok bolesti. On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. 12:20-23). i samo zdravlje”. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele. Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. 13:6-12). kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. Korinñani (I Kor. 121-124. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja.

bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. S druge strane. “dobronamerna”. ne izleåe åoveka. smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi. Inaåe. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. pre svega. sile i one druge. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. odnosno unesreñe”.218 Teoloãki åasopis. biñe mu oproãteno. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. kroz krizu verovanja. Religiozna oseñanja. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. Izmeœu ostalog. N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. kao Boæiji dar. Strikoviñem. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. ako je i uåinio grehe. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe. dakle. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista. Ispovedajte. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige. Drugim reåima. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. 26 .

Zaista. Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. da budete isceljeni. Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. prihvatiti. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Illinois: IVP. voleti. Downers Grove. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!). Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. ur. Carson D. Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. 1994 New bible commentary. 27 27 Isto. Daruvar. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke.” (Jak. . kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. ispovedanje greha. Molitva vere.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. Galvin C. Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. CITIRANA DELA Anderson T. Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. A.

2000 O anœelima. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. Verman R. demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora. U. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Zagreb. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M. Åarniña. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD.S. Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels.A. Kalifornija.A. Javier. Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M.M.220 Teoloãki åasopis. David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Hrvatska: STEPress. . Ventura. Oropeza B. Wagner C.: Regal Books.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful